ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Karl's comments at the 2003 Senate hearings on allocation systems

  • To: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>, kidsearch <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] Karl's comments at the 2003 Senate hearings on allocation systems
  • From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 06:00:33 -0800 (PST)
  • Cc: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>, ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=p7qt8JADE+dmkoiuPaAejiRKuDaFA9HTyPeYzn8BhV39PwL4VjjCxCGtoz7W8ja2G/uf/byRHxT3ugK9rOqr0t5NXE/eM4FQIi1XTn54oQdblu2MTyB3MAcRiC/T9HNWMlzx+PKM09N3ZBmagrMiYApEWYp6e2apuSnAS/avPdE= ;
  • In-reply-to: <20051220133219.42028.qmail@web53514.mail.yahoo.com>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Danny,
   
  What registrants will be hurt? Speculators? Squatters? Believe it or not when teaching capitalism to persons coming out of other forms of enterprise, the first lesson that should be taught is the "Right to Fail". No firing squads, debtors' prisons or need for suicide based in shame. Ben Franklyn said of the lightbulb "it was achieved by 1,999 failures".
   
  Business plan review by its' very nature must be confined to a very few in confidence, therefor it cannot be open and transparent anyway.  The whole notion of doing it at all is communistic in principal. "a committee shall review and determine if the plan is in the best interests of the State". It is pure fraud.
   
  e

Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
  Chris writes: "A bunch of people sitting on the ICANN
BoD with dubious business acumen deciding whether or
not my business
plan is valid doesn't interest me at all."

Having noted the failure of the .pro business plan (we
are now into our second registry management group),
and the failure of .name to get off the ground, I
agree with Chris that ICANN lacks the competency to
evaluate business plans.

On the other hand, I'm not willing to take the
cavalier attitude that if a registry fails it's not a
big deal (as invariably it's the registrants that will
be affected). 

That said, I would be comfortable passing on the
business plan examination if I has assurances that
ICANN had developed a registry failover program.

My policy recommendation: To expedite the launch of
new gTLDs ICANN should eliminate registry financial
considerations as a selection criterion; to safeguard
the public interest ICANN should create a registry
failover program.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
  


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>